288 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

I suspect if you skipped all the combat it would result in the story seeming really poorly paced and wierd.

Though I wouldn't mind being able to skip some of the pointless filler combat that's in RPGs, particularly on replays.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Do you not think Bioware would let Hepler go if they didn't consider her valuable? Who are you, precisely, to question whether Hepler is sufficiently valuable to the company? Are you part of Bioware's marketing team, or quality control? Seriously, do you hear yourself? Clearly her observations and everything else she brings to the table are quite valuable and relevant. Otherwise she would not be employed there.

I don't think Joy Division was claiming that Hepler isn't valuable already. I think she was just saying that her value to the company would increase even more then it already is if she offered her opinions on combat and gameplay and whatnot.

Which doesn't mean she isn't a valuable employee.

Perhaps, but that's not how I interpreted her comment.  I'll wait to read what Joy Division has to say on the matter, though I do always appreciate your input, TEWR.

[Silfren]

Wulfram wrote...

I suspect if you skipped all the combat it would result in the story seeming really poorly paced and wierd.

Though I wouldn't mind being able to skip some of the pointless filler combat that's in RPGs, particularly on replays.

There are certain aspects to DA games, both Origins and 2, that seem poorly paced and awkwardly timed regardless of how long the combat goes.  Speaking from someone who has both gone through the combat the "right" way, and also used the killalllhostiles feature since after the first full playthrough all the fighting struck me as boring and repetitive.

When the story is supposed to take place over the span of a year, or seven years, and yet real-time playing means the game is over within a matter of so many hours, which can translate to either a couple days of play or several months worth depending on the individual player, I think it's nearly impossible to have a game where the pacing doesn't seem bizarre.

Modifié par Silfren, 23 février 2012 - 07:37 .

[Joy Divison]

Silfren wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Do you not think Bioware would let Hepler go if they didn't consider her valuable? Who are you, precisely, to question whether Hepler is sufficiently valuable to the company? Are you part of Bioware's marketing team, or quality control? Seriously, do you hear yourself? Clearly her observations and everything else she brings to the table are quite valuable and relevant. Otherwise she would not be employed there.

I don't think Joy Division was claiming that Hepler isn't valuable already. I think she was just saying that her value to the company would increase even more then it already is if she offered her opinions on combat and gameplay and whatnot.

Which doesn't mean she isn't a valuable employee.

Perhaps, but that's not how I interpreted her comment.  I'll wait to read what Joy Division has to say on the matter, though I do always appreciate your input, TEWR.

You interpreted incorrectly.

I never said Hepler was not a valuable asset to the company.  I never claimed or even implied she was not "sufficently valauable" or even passing judgment in that regard.  That is something you imagined because I made the observation that she would be more valuable if she could and would offer constructive feedback on the combat mechanics of games which are 90% devoted to combat.

I am not sure why you need my personal clarification on a point that another poster understood perfectly, but there it is.

[Wulfram]

There's awkward pacing, and there's jumping straight from "Mwahahahahaa, I have you now" to "Aargh, how can you have defeated me?" without anything in between.

To do it right, you'd need to include cutscenes to replace the more significant battles. But that would take too many resources.

To be honest, I'm sort of surprised there aren't more "interactive movies" or whatver they should be called which entirely drop the traditional gameplay for just allowing the player to take a role in a story.

[Huntress]

Joy Divison wrote...

Huntress wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

Do you know whats a writer's job? I guess not.. here let me spell it out for you.

A writer, is all about creating a story, and thats what Hepler do very well, she has nothing to do with combat design, she has nothing to do with game desing, she  made a comment about skip combat 6 years ago and people as paranoid as you blow it out of proportion. She in no way or form is saying that is going to be included in the games but never mind that lets insult her! because she clearly deserve it, you guys make me want to puke, you all know she is a writer but still insult her because of a game design.. sick.. thats the word you guys are sick and need help.

Skip combat is not new I remember using it in Lords of magic, Etherlords and many others games, after reading all this I belive the haters need a  Brain Doctor http://www.thefreedi...om/brain doctor

If you are done making ad hominem attacks and care to actually explain how my post was "paranoid," how I insulted her, or blew her comments out of proportion, then do so.

I also suggest you re-read my post, then re-read yours, and ask yourself honestly if the way you treated me and my post is the same thing as what Hepler's critics do who make you want to "puke."

Am sorry let me spell it more clearly!

Paranoid comment: I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

It didn't happen in DAO, didnt happen in mass effect, didnt happen in DA2 still you are worried of it might happen?  That comment was 6 years ago how much longer do you need prove that it won't be incorporated to DA/ME universe? The skip option is in KOA for the IF you didn't know.

what if never happens.. thought of that? No?
Now many players wanted to be able to skip combat in DA2, I surely want to skip the starting point!! can I just skip to the Mirror room please? thanks!!

I guess Hepler needs a Medal because She foresaw the day Dragon Age will need skip bottom? The haters didn't think of that part or you.

Now check the not so smart part: "Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus
there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not
adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful
positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics."

You know she is a writer and had zero influence on a design in the games or combat mechanism but still you want her to do what exactly? 
I am going crazy or stupid?.. You want her to contribute on something she is not part of? What happened 6 years after  she comment about "skip combat option"?

Oh I am very sorry if you are not a hater and I said you were.. I beg you're pardon.

[Ianamus]

While I agree that combat/gameplay is as much a part of the experience as the story, It really does depend how it is handled. I got very tired of DA2's waves of enemies and playing through locations over and over again, to the point where I became really bored of the gameplay and was only playing to see where the story went (particularly during Act 3 which offered next to no new enemies/areas). I almost wished I could skip the repetetive gameplay completely. 

Then again, I don't think that the answer is to give the option to skip gameplay segments, but to improve the gameplay so that it dosen't become boring and tedious to play through. You cant have a bad story and good gameplay, or bad gameplay and good story and try to justify dialogue skipping or combat skipping becuase of it.

If done properly the story and gameplay should both be good enough that the majority of people don't want to skip either.

Modifié par EJ107, 23 février 2012 - 08:25 .

[Joy Divison]

Huntress wrote...

I am going crazy or stupid?

I'll try to be nice.

You clearly are passionate about this but your passions are making you project things other people have said onto me.

If you think "I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so" is paranoid, well, I don't know what to say other than you don't know what the word paranoid means.

I did not demand that Hepler contribute to the combat mechanics.  I said if she were a willing contributor in this respect, it would almost certainly improve the efficiency of the process as well as the final result, i.e., she would be a more valuable contributor than she already is.

I also am actually one of those people who would have liked to skip some of DA2's combat because I think it is ill conceived and poorly executed.  It is a shame there was not a strong enough soul in the development process who cared enough about the combat aspect of the game to put their foot down and say that the constantly exploding enemies, paratroop waves, and enemies with literally hundreds of thousands of hit points were not up to the standards of Bioware's reputation.  So, yes, there are advantages to be gained with critical feedback from people whose job description is "writer."

Modifié par Joy Divison, 23 février 2012 - 09:31 .

[Silfren]

Joy Divison wrote...

Silfren wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Do you not think Bioware would let Hepler go if they didn't consider her valuable? Who are you, precisely, to question whether Hepler is sufficiently valuable to the company? Are you part of Bioware's marketing team, or quality control? Seriously, do you hear yourself? Clearly her observations and everything else she brings to the table are quite valuable and relevant. Otherwise she would not be employed there.

I don't think Joy Division was claiming that Hepler isn't valuable already. I think she was just saying that her value to the company would increase even more then it already is if she offered her opinions on combat and gameplay and whatnot.

Which doesn't mean she isn't a valuable employee.

Perhaps, but that's not how I interpreted her comment.  I'll wait to read what Joy Division has to say on the matter, though I do always appreciate your input, TEWR.

You interpreted incorrectly.

I never said Hepler was not a valuable asset to the company.  I never claimed or even implied she was not "sufficently valauable" or even passing judgment in that regard.  That is something you imagined because I made the observation that she would be more valuable if she could and would offer constructive feedback on the combat mechanics of games which are 90% devoted to combat.

I am not sure why you need my personal clarification on a point that another poster understood perfectly, but there it is.

I re-read the original post that brought this about, and you're right, the first time I read your comment, my mind read "valuable" where it should have read "more valuable."  I apologize for the mis-read, which was my fault. 

I do note, however, that you did imply that her current position on combat means that any advice from her on such is invalid, and my dispute with you on that stands, based on my previous comment pointing out that a lot of gamers do apparently agree with her that having the option to skip combat is something they would use. 

I do not think there is anything at all wrong with Hepler's position that having an option to fast-foward through combat would be useful, or that her believing such means that she is therefore less valuable to the Bioware team than she would otherwise be.

[Silfren]

Wulfram wrote...

There's awkward pacing, and there's jumping straight from "Mwahahahahaa, I have you now" to "Aargh, how can you have defeated me?" without anything in between.

To do it right, you'd need to include cutscenes to replace the more significant battles. But that would take too many resources.

To be honest, I'm sort of surprised there aren't more "interactive movies" or whatver they should be called which entirely drop the traditional gameplay for just allowing the player to take a role in a story.

See, I'm not sure there's really all that much difference between an all-out skipping of combat, and accessing the console to killallhostiles.  If the problem you're pointing to is the breaking of immersion, well, either option will do that.  So people who want to skip combat in the first place are obviously not really bothered by the loss of immersion.  You wouldn't need a cutscene for a fast-forward button any more than you would for the console cheat. 

There's an argument to be had that it doesn't really take anything from the game at all, because are people going to do who fight through the battle only to lose?  Restart from a previous save point, that's what.  We all ultimately know that the outcome is going to be that we win, because otherwise the game won't go forward.  So I don't think there's any real loss of immersion or decreased enjoyment or whatever, for achieving the exact same end, which is the end of the battle and whatever cutscene will follow it, through different means.

Also, I suspect that while a lot of people would take advantage of a skip combat button on the first go, for the majority of players who would want such a feature, it would be for all the playthroughs they do after the initial one, in order to see other branches of the story.  I know that's certainly the case for myself.  I always do a playthrough without any cheats on the first go, but afterward, when I already know the general way things are going to go and I just want to explore alternative branches, all that combat, especially the trash mobs, is really tedious and boring.  

[Silfren]

Joy Divison wrote...

These are not unreasonable premises. And I actually kind of agree with #1. Sure Hepler probably had zero influence in DA:O combat system and thus there was no negative effect, But that also means she is probably not adding constructive combat feedback and thus no making a meaningful positive contribution when it comes to combat mechanics. It not necessary to have people who like combat design these games, but their input could offer valuable insights and make the process more efficient and ultimately wind up with a better system.

I'm not sure I agree with #2 and I wouldn't be money on it, but it could wind up being a long term trend we notice in five years or so.

Ultimately the solution is less "trash mob" combats and more meaningful encounters.

I definitely agree that we need more meaningful encounters and far fewer trash mobs. 

But it does seem to be the case that you think Hepler is the primary writer for the team, or that there is no one other than herself available to provide valuable feedback on the combat system.

Hepler did not design the game.  She wrote SOME of the story and SOME of the characters.  Yes, it's true that she could possibly provide feedback on combat which would make her even more valuable.  Which she did, actually, with her remark about optionally skippable combat.  But the implication you're providing here is that she does not currently provide a meaningful positive contribution to the game design and that this is detrimental to Bioware in some way.  It ignores that Hepler is not Bioware's sole and only possible chance for that meaningful positive contribution, and assumes that what she already does provide is not meaningful.

Bioware HAS people who like combat designing the games.  Why does everyone keep implying that Hepler is failing to fulfill her job fuction? 

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Joy Divison wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Edit: It'd be different with a heavily combat-oriented game like Diablo where the gameplay is nothing but combat. There is no point even purchasing a game like that if you don't have 'time' for combat. But Bioware titles tend to have more to their gameplay than killing things, and a fair number of RPGers prefer the parts of the game that contain RP.

How is DA and DA2 not combat oriented? 90% of the game is advanced by killing stuff.  100% of things you get from leveling up is dedicated to killing stuff.  Sure, there is a story in there, but the game at its heart, like most RPGs in the style of Gygax's Dungeons and Dragons, is about becoming a hero by killing things and taking their stuff.

And assuming your statistical analysis is correct, so what? Being able to skip combat when I'm wanting to get to next story point and tiring of Yet Another Mob Fight doesn't mean I will always skip combat. Nor will it affect how you play your game.

Also, if you have any experience with D&D, you'll know that such campaigns are as varied in their gameplay as their players and DMs. And that DMs don't force their players to do stuff they don't find fun, unless they want to end up looking for new players.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

There wouldn't be much implementation required though, because as has been pointed out earlier in the thread, a console command already exists where you can kill all hostiles. Turning it into a button accessible via the GUI shouldn't take all that much work away from improving general gameplay.

It would be desirable whether or not combat was improved, because no matter how easy combat is or how pretty it looks it'll always take time (if you add up all the minutes every combat takes, it's a lot of time).

But a good portion of the fun in video games like these stems from the combat and gameplay. It adds to a sense of how you do things.

I guess in a way it's a facet of roleplaying (for me anyway). Did you weaken the Archdemon by spamming the Ballistae (in terms of gameplay combat, it's somewhat cheap. In terms of realistic combat, it's a fair tactic)? Did you weaken him by hurling magic at him? Did you fight him up close and personal with a sword and shield.

That's how you play, and that's fine. I don't disagree with you, but forcing gamers to play sections of gameplay they don't like until they get it isn't the way, IMO.

To skip over it for any reason -- whether it's too difficult even on Casual (not that anyone actually has this problem. Just an example) or you just don't have time -- cuts out some of that. How did you accomplish your goals?

For a lot of combats (the ones that aren't rigged to be special), you usually accomplish it exactly the same way you accomplished the previous combat. That's why it can get so tedious.

Plus, RPGers have imaginations. I'm sure they can imagine a good fight scene to fill in the gaps.

Even though it may not take much to implement, what's to stop Bioware from saying "Well we did this thing with the skip combat feature. Let's call it a day on combat and gameplay and focus on other things."?

Do I have to dignify that with an answer? Come on.

Also, if you skip combat and move into a cutscene, you may not know what happened. Hell, you may miss out on valuable loot, especially in scenarios like Tranquility. Personally, I hated that design decision, but it's just an example.

I don't think it'd be hard to figure out what happened. Combat starts! I click my fast-forward button. Bad guys fall over (after what I'm sure was a thrilling battle). I win. Cutscene!

While I couldn't care less about loot, and I'd consider it fair if you *did* miss out if you didn't fight the fight, if a 'kill all hostiles' was implemented then there's nothing to stop xp and loot dropping.

It also means that you can just easily plow through the game.

Easy Mode exists so people can easily plow through the game. Easy isn't the point. Fast is. And I see no problem allowing people to shorten their game's length if that's what they want.

All the more reason for gameplay to improve first and make it challenging/tactical.

*shrug* No matter how awesome it may become, some people have little patience for combat and play RPGs primarily for the story content and NPC interactions. Making fights more challenging and tactical is cool and all, but for now it's still just time-eating combat.

[mousestalker]

As a matter of information, I deliberately played one run through of DAO as a stealth maxed rogue. Combat simply didn't happen for the most part. It was a fun play through simply because it avoided the dire repetition of "Oh joy 3 mobs ahead! Slappity slap kill, die, burn, choppity chop" which gets old after the thirteenth or fourteenth time.

Not having to slog through every combat in game would be a welcome relief, especially for those of us, who when they find a good game, play it more than once to select different roleplaying options.

Modifié par mousestalker, 23 février 2012 - 11:20 .

[Foolsfolly]

Meris wrote...

I am of the belief that Combat is, or has always been, a far too much of a major aspect of gameplay in RPG. Roleplaying could stand to have more gameplay features, such as a expanded dialogue tree that deals in actions and gives you more options to complete a quest (or at least instances when you actually do have more options are more frequent than in, say Origins with, perhaps, 10 stat - other than coercion - checks throught the game).

But gameplay wise, BioWare rpgs are about both combat and dialogue. One cannot stand without the other since the first implies most of the gameplay and the latter, most of the storytelling. Simply skipping combat is too much of a superficial solution to satisfy.

On the more panicked hand, I believe that ME3's 'skip combat' and 'automate dialogue' options estabilish a dangerous precedent where the focus of one or the other might change. The storytelling might become more guided (JRPG style) than it currently already is.

I believe gameplay will always be king because it's fun. And fun is one of the points. If the gameplay isn't fun then you have a bad game. Sure a good story can make up for bad gameplay and make you wish you could skip combat... but that's not a fix to that problem. The fix to that problem is better gameplay not a way to skip bad gameplay.

ME3's automatic dialogue is stupid. It's only for children too young to read. Because who was complaining about how complicated it was to pick what to say?

[Jozape]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I would love the ability to skip combat. I would likely only use it in games with bad combat (like DA2), but being able to avoid part of the game that I'm not enjoying would be very welcome.

Never really considered that. I'd probably have skipped every encounter in Dragon Age 2 past the first few ones if I had the option.

[Addai]

Silfren wrote...
Bioware HAS people who like combat designing the games.  Why does everyone keep implying that Hepler is failing to fulfill her job fuction? 

I think the more startling part of the interview was that she doesn't like playing games.  I don't like a lot of games, either, but I'm not working in the gaming industry.  She seemed to realize it was controversial as she said it.

[Skypezee]

Addai67 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Bioware HAS people who like combat designing the games.  Why does everyone keep implying that Hepler is failing to fulfill her job fuction? 

I think the more startling part of the interview was that she doesn't like playing games.  I don't like a lot of games, either, but I'm not working in the gaming industry.  She seemed to realize it was controversial as she said it.

Actually what she said was that she didn't like playing games because she's not that good at it. She admits that she doesn't like character managing, inventory managing, and has poor hand-eye-coordination. But what she does seem to enjoy are the pen and paper RPGs and games like Deus Ex. She enjoys the type of games that are more story driven.

[Addai]

I can just picture my boss' face if I gave an interview saying "I don't really like [our product] because I'm no good at operating it, and who has the time anyway?"

No one deserves the personal attacks, but it's easy to see why with DA2 tanking she became a convenient target, since she wrote the mage-templar quest line which was a major focus and Anders who was practically the main character of the game.

[Silfren]

Addai67 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Bioware HAS people who like combat designing the games.  Why does everyone keep implying that Hepler is failing to fulfill her job fuction? 

I think the more startling part of the interview was that she doesn't like playing games.  I don't like a lot of games, either, but I'm not working in the gaming industry.  She seemed to realize it was controversial as she said it.

I don't think Hepler actually meant that as she literally doesn't like to play games at all, ever, under any circumstance.  In which case it would be odd for her to work on video games.  I'm pretty sure she meant it in precisely the context it was meant: a pregnant woman with limited time who was frustrated with various aspects of games that drag on and prevent her from being able to enjoy the part of games she does enjoy because of time constraints.  

The notion that she loathes games and hates playing them is a gross exaggeration that has been divorced from the context in which she said it.

[Addai]

Silfren wrote...
I don't think Hepler actually meant that as she literally doesn't like to play games at all, ever, under any circumstance.  In which case it would be odd for her to work on video games.  I'm pretty sure she meant it in precisely the context it was meant: a pregnant woman with limited time who was frustrated with various aspects of games that drag on and prevent her from being able to enjoy the part of games she does enjoy because of time constraints.  

The notion that she loathes games and hates playing them is a gross exaggeration that has been divorced from the context in which she said it.

Well she also generalized that for women players, we want a skip button so we can just watch it like a movie and get it over with so we can go back to the dishes.  And this idea that she's a big deal because she's a woman is something that cropped up again in the response to /v/'s - admittedly disgusting and over the top- jihad against her.  I also shake my head when she admits she had her husband take over the controls during the shooting parts.  That's...   I dunno...  I'm not a hardcore gamer and play mostly for story, but I'm pretty sure I could kick my husband's *** in certain games.  If I couldn't play a game on my own, I wouldn't play it at all.

Maybe others find this refreshing and feel like she speaks for them, but to me it does sound like a recipe for games I don't want to play.  Add to that the fact that DA2 was hammy and soap opera-ish, and I can agree with the argument behind the trolling even though I deplore what the cretins did.

Modifié par Addai67, 24 février 2012 - 01:41 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Addai67 wrote...

I can just picture my boss' face if I gave an interview saying "I don't really like [our product] because I'm no good at operating it, and who has the time anyway?"

Misrepresented.

Say, rather, "I don't like this part of [our product] because of [X], but I love this part of [our product] so much I'd still buy it just for this part."

[DragonRageGT]

First, I'd think it is a real minority, like 10 out of 1,000,000 gamers who are moms with babies and no time to play and insist in playing a video game.

Perhaps some 20 out of 2,000,000 would love a "skip" button in a RPG which is made of both combat and story. If it were the other way around, games would be like that for a long time now.

If someone "hates" some aspects of a game, don't play it. There are lots of games which have no combat at all. If you are no gamer then don't play games. If you get out in the rain, prepare to get wet. If you jump in the fire, get ready to burn. If you want to play games which have combat and story, L2P. If you don't like to play, to go down to the playground!

[Addai]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

I can just picture my boss' face if I gave an interview saying "I don't really like [our product] because I'm no good at operating it, and who has the time anyway?"

Misrepresented.

Say, rather, "I don't like this part of [our product] because of [X], but I love this part of [our product] so much I'd still buy it just for this part."

Whatever.  I'm not going to parse, but overall the interview comes off as pretty negative about video games.

[Joy Divison]

@ Silfren

You are so committed to defending Hepler, you are taking what I said way too far. You say I implied that "she does not currently provide a meaningful contribution to the game design." That is so far off base I'm not even going to dignify that with a comment. And nothing I said implied that she was the primary game designer or that nobody else was providing valuable feedback on combat. In the post above you complain about people who grossly exaggerate her comments that have been "divorced from the context in which she said it." Hello?

Tell me where I implied Hepler does not provide a meaningful contribution to Bioware. Just because I say she could be a more valuable contributor if she actually liked the combat (which is the heart of the Dragon Age games) enough to play it and aid in the development of combat mechanics does *NOT* mean, imply, suggest, of infer that I believe her contributions to the game are not meaninful or she isn't doing her job. That's you putting words in my mouth.

@ Shadow of Light Dragon.

I was simply making the point that the Dragon Age games are indeed "heavily combat-oriented games." I personally don't care about the whole "skip button" issue. It just struck me as odd that Dragon Age might not be considered combat-oriented games when 90% of the the gameplay is advanced by killing things and 100% of the perks gained from leveling up in DA2 are devoted to combat.

And, yes, I do have enough experience in D&D to know the game evolved from a medieval combat simulation so combat has always represented the heart of the core rules of the game and with each edition of the game, non-combat elements have been removed from the game. And most PC-DM clashes result in the PC acquiescing to the DM's wish rather than vice-versa.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

DragonRageGT wrote...

First, I'd think it is a real minority, like 10 out of 1,000,000 gamers who are moms with babies and no time to play and insist in playing a video game.

Perhaps some 20 out of 2,000,000 would love a "skip" button in a RPG which is made of both combat and story. If it were the other way around, games would be like that for a long time now.

Can you please come back when you've interviewed 1,000,000 gamer mothers with children, then the 2,000,000 general RPGers? Then I'll give your comments some credence.

If someone "hates" some aspects of a game, don't play it.

Really? Deny yourself the pleasure of playing the parts you love just because there are bits you hate? Do you throw out your entire salad because there's wedges of tomato in it? The sensible route would be to either pick out the tomato, or ask the waiter to serve it without tomato. Even if the salad is 50% tomato there'll be other things on the plate, just not as much.

Addai67 wrote...
Whatever.  I'm not going to parse, but overall the interview comes off as pretty negative about video games.

Because Hepler fits the stereotype of a mother with kids who does the housework and sucks at the 'manly' parts of games? Should this demographic be silent and ignored so as to not to reinforce the 'chicks suck at games' mindset? Was she out of line to provide honest context for her answers?

Joy Divison wrote...

I was simply making the point that the Dragon Age games are indeed "heavily combat-oriented games." I personally don't care about the whole "skip button" issue. It just struck me as odd that Dragon Age might not be considered combat-oriented games when 90% of the the gameplay is advanced by killing things and 100% of the perks gained from leveling up in DA2 are devoted to combat.

While they do contain a lot of combat, Dragon Age is not on par with Diablo in terms of action elements. If you completely removed combat from Diablo you'd be walking around an empty world, excepting merchants. Dragon Age has more to its gameplay than combat, which is what I was driving at. Dragon Age also grants you experience for reading books, solving quests that have no basis in combat, and so forth. Yes, you are right that all the skills and items in DA2 are devoted to combat, but it's a direction I personally despise--a sentiment I, and others, share with the latest edition of D&D.

And, yes, I do have enough experience in D&D to know the game evolved from a medieval combat simulation so combat has always represented the heart of the core rules of the game and with each edition of the game, non-combat elements have been removed from the game.

A reason why none of my gaming buddies migrated to it. We had some long rants about Wizards of the Coast.

And most PC-DM clashes result in the PC acquiescing to the DM's wish rather than vice-versa.

Maybe in your games. My experiences have been different (and no, I was never personally a part of such a clash).